2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSimple hypothetical: candidate A gets more votes, candidate B more pledged delegates
Candidate A gets more popular votes while Candidate B get more pledged delegates.
Neither have enough pledged delegates to secure the nomination. Who should get the nomination? How should the super delegates cast their votes?
dchill
(38,503 posts)That's the rule, that's how the campaigns are strategized.
HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)And penalized for moving up in the calendar.
revbones
(3,660 posts)HerbChestnut
(3,649 posts)She could still lose the nomination, and there would be a precedent for doing so.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)drray23
(7,633 posts)Hillary has both more pledged delegates and popular votes.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)drray23
(7,633 posts)Just thought I would throw in a cheap shot.. could not resist. Anyhow, in all seriousness, I am not sure what the answer should be. Given the rules, I would guess that the super delegates would have to vote their conscience. Whatever they feel is appropriate for the party.
CalvinballPro
(1,019 posts)drray23
(7,633 posts)After all, he did help shape the existing super delegate rules. Maybe he would push this new rule through. That could be the new campaign strategy.
Gwhittey
(1,377 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Why on earth would superdelegates want to switch to candidate B?
morningfog
(18,115 posts)But I'll answer yours, they wouldn't.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)That's the currency used in this particular transaction.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)jmg257
(11,996 posts)Its the party's convention after all.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)won the popular and won more states, but didn't secure the nomination with pledged delegates alone.
Same answer?
jmg257
(11,996 posts)Trump will be in a similiar situation (without the supers).
The party has its own interests.
thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)...the single most important thing, if it actually is a close enough contest to fall to the super delegates, is to select the candidate with the best chance of winning the general election.
I'd say that's really the essential function of the super delegates. There's a reason the rules don't simply say, whoever has the most delegates wins, or whoever has the most delegates of the last two standing wins. If a delegate wins 2,383, the nomination is theirs. If a candidate was not able to generate that level of support, if you have a closely contested race or one where no one achieved a majority, the SD are supposed to choose who they think will be the best candidate, and I would say that the first criteria would be who is most likely to win. If the Super Delegates are not supposed to be able to select someone other than the person with the most delegates, then they have no reason to exist, the party could simply automatically nominate the candidate with the most delegates. But that's not the system we have.
I would say that, if neither candidate is clearly more likely to win in November, they should stick with the delegate leader.
(And one of the advantages of the calendar this year is that the Dems will know who the Republican candidate is before possibly having to make any choice.)
DrDan
(20,411 posts)How should the supers vote?
That is the more probable scenario.